Add employer to the list of concepts you're struggling with.

Yeah, I mean.. that was one of the most offensive diatribes I've ever read in this thread.

Maybe I'm an *******, but for me I just don't bother with anybody who makes it clear to me they are too deeply entrenched in their own prejudices to be worth the effort to try to change them. The likelihood is so low and the effort and stress so massive.

I won't name any of the people here I think fit that categroy, I assume you know who I'm speaking of anyway, but in contrast people like ianaww or Luckbox seem open minded to learning and factoring in others' perspectives, I'd rather spend my time with them than others who display no interest in actually hearing me.

I'm definitely an *******, actually, but not for the reason I listed above

People need help with child custody, with employment issues, contract enforcement, etc.

It would be massively difficult for the state to maintain a public civil law office, and absurdly redundant in light of the alternative I'm proposing.

Under common-law rules, anyone who performs services for you is your employee if you can control what will be done and how it will be done. cit


also - could this be yet another infractable post from our benevolent moderator?

Is the poster struggling?

while we're competing for semantic acumen...

There is absolutely no way the state should allow you to charge yourself out to people and claim it against tax. You should be paid at set rates, obviously.

Go ahead and infract me

I don't care how the IRS defines an employee. I don't pay American tax.

Pretty sure you're a leftist, and it's telling you interpret it as a perjorative.

The Left wants to deprive us in the Center and Right from the very language because when we can use the full spectrum of words without fear of recrimination, they lose the argument every single time. No wonder they want to shut us up!

Here a word. There a word.

Shhhhhhhhh!

Fair point.

I'm fine with the needle. But wouldn't mind an amendment saying hey let's punish people in such a way that they won't victimize someone in the first place, thus making everyone happy!

whatever gets things cheaper is fine with me

yes

We conservatives didn't get justice during Obama's term. So this is what happens when the earnest liberals break things: conservative president, house, senate, and soon judiciary.

Just one example: IRS going after conservative non-profits.

When liberals don't get THEIR way, on the other hand, they throw chairs around and start fires in their own neighborhoods. *shake my head*

We're at least smart enough to go to the ballot box.

***** please. You got the most right-wing possible national healthcare plan (the ACA), war all the time, both houses of Congress, and 40% of the population pregreased for a fascist cleptocracy.

Let's not be greedy.

Dude, monkey will apply the rules equally. I'm not saying you can't use the word leftist or liberal, I'm saying it's probably uncouth to use it in a pejorative sense. Not sure how you jump from that to "You're taking my right to use words away!" You can't call anybody a stupid ****ing ******* in this thread anymore either. Has your right to language been taken away because of that?

That type of punishment doesn't work. Didn't you write a post earlier saying that criminals gonna criminal whether or not you ban guns? Why will criminals not criminal even if you have example type punishments?

Kleptocracy. Idk what a cleptocracy is, I guess a state run by the college level examination program.

Your definition of right-wing and my definition of right-wing are in different hemispheres, apparently.

A little war now and then prevents a big war now and then.

Both houses of Congress Republican. Excite!

Fascist cleptocracy? We won fair and square! People are more than welcome to vote Democrat in 2020 if they don't like it.

They're gonna carry regardless of whether it's outlawed, not "gonna criminal." I don't think it should be illegals for bad guys to carry guns. If they are that bad then they should just be locked up. If they're out, why can't they protect themselves against even worse guys?

But I'm hoping they aren't so quick to use those guns to commit more crimes when they understand the sheep are not unarmed any more.

And as for example-type punishments, that will reduce crime even further.

Even as we speak, lengthy prison sentences are the only thing keeping certain people from killing other certain people or from raping other people, etc.

European criminal punishment is a joke.

The stuff they give 3-5 years in prison for in Europe they'd get 15-25 years behind bars for in the United States (closer to 15 in lol-lefty states like the Left Coast and closer to 25 in God's Own Republic of Texas).

Well, with Trump literally shoving his cock down the throats of old people (one of his most important demos) that shouldn't be too much of an ask

Not for nothing but NC has been wrapped in legal battles that have prevented any executions since 2006. Violent crime has dropped statewide over this period of time.

The likelihood of being sentenced to death in this state is largely dependent on which county you are tried. Rural counties are significantly more likely to sentence defendants to death. (I can cite sources for this, its not my opinion, its fact.)

Not sure how much evidence we need to support that the death penalty doesn't deter crimes or that it is categorically impossible to impose the death sentence fairly, but my state does a good job of producing large amounts of it.

Your race, your gender, the races of the jury members, and the location of your trial are all factors in the likelihood you will be sentenced to death. It cannot be done fairly, uniformly, and without bias. That's all the info I need to know its unconstitutional and should be done away with immediately.

NC Attorney General Josh Stein and NC Governor Roy Cooper are both liberals who both support the death penalty, despite a 10+ year period without executions and a dropping violent crime rate. I voted for both of them because of HB2, the clean power issues, raising teachers wages etc. But they are both completely wrong about the death penalty. To make it worse, clemency is completely in the hands of the governor.

I really should have contacted them both by now as I am a member of their constituency and have the right to be heard, but I haven't yet and that't totally on me. :/

According to the NCCADP:

Whether you are sentenced to death is heavily dependent on where you are tried. While the death penalty is intended to be reserved for the “worst of the worst,” it is instead applied differently in every county in North Carolina. Nineteen counties have not sentenced anyone to death in the modern era of the death penalty. Most urban counties have sentenced no more than 3 percent of murderers to death. Meanwhile, many rural counties sentence people to death at far higher rates, some as high as 15 percent.

You only need to look at crime rates across countries or states to see that the exemplary punishments Zorkman thinks deter crime in fact don't. Crime doesn't work like that.

Among the many criticisms I have of rightwing "thought", the refusal to adhere to reality and instead dwell in a childish fantasy in which a Big Daddy who shows the stick to errant children leads to a harmonious nation is one of the strongest. The utter refusal to try to understand how people really work is just another outcome of not really believing that other people are real.

The legal issues our state is dealing with re death penalty are legion, but one of the big ones is that it used to be a legal requirement for a doctor to be involved in the executions, but because doctors started refusing to be involved on ethical grounds, they changed the law so other medical professionals can do it instead. Now if they were to do an execution via lethal injection, my states only method available, they would not need an actual doctor to do it.

Iirc we also had a Racial Justice Act that protected people from the death sentence on the grounds of race, or in practice being sentenced to death because of the race of their juries. Numerous sentences were commuted to life in prison without parole based on findings that implicated a racial factor, so what did NC do? They swiftly repealed it.

Punishment does not prevent crime. If you want to prevent crime, eradicate poverty.


Texas just executed a paranoid schizophrenic this week, btw. He committed his (admittedly heinous) crimes 10 days after receiving electric shock therapy, and had a history of paranoid delusions. He tried to take the judge hostage at his trial. They didn't declare a mistrial, told the jury about it, and continued on with the same judge. Jury rejected his insanity plea.

USA- the land of executing the mentally ill

And just from my own personal experience, the threat of a beating never once deterred me as a child from getting into trouble.

It just made me significantly more adept at lying and not getting caught. And the beatings only made me a more defiant angry person.

Rehabilitating my bad behavior would not have had the same effect, and I could have been an awesome person far sooner and with less work from all parties involved.

im pretty sure the death penalty isn't preventing anyone in this thread from killing people.

what i mean is the reasons i don't kill people have nothing to do with the death penalty. i'd say it's the same for just about everyone.